Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
CALMSP
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:35 pm

jayunited wrote:
trueblew wrote:
Everyone is waxing lyrical about these high-J configs and corporate contracts etc etc.... but where are the hordes of J customers and corporate travelers to fill them? It's mostly Group 4-5 pax currently and will likely still be when this route launches.



No one is saying UA will fill 46 Polaris seats with paying customers, no one is making that assertion. What people are saying is because these routes are very competitive UA really has no choice. Back in April and May UA on our EWR-SFO/LAX routes replace our lie flat seats with 738s and 739ERs a cost cutting move. However that move backfired and cost UA dearly by the time June came around UA has replaced 738s and 739ERs with RR 752s, 763s, 789s and 78Xs. Even though we are still in the middle of a pandemic and business travel remains down these routes NYC-LAX/SFO are still as competitive as ever and launching these routes with anything other than lie flat seats would be a disaster for UA. Everyone knows for now business class ticket prices are near all time lows on these routes but again because of the nature of these routes and competition an airline like UA can't put any other aircraft on these routes.

Sure UA could use our 169 seats RR 752s but you've just eliminated your ability to carry large amounts of cargo. Launching these routes with a 763 at least gives UA the opportunity to carry 30,000 LBS or more of cargo on each flight in each direction.



What backfired by moving to smaller a/c during a time when no one is flying? This is more of a situation where some other routes have been reinstated and the 737's are going there and then running larger planes between the coasts. PAX numbers do not require any larger a/c right now based on the boarding totals. 250 open seats on a 777?
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2268
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Fri Nov 13, 2020 3:40 pm

SurfandSnow wrote:
EWR was never going to be an appropriate UA gateway to places like Brooklyn and the Hamptons. I suspect UA FFers on both coasts, particularly those that call themselves "bicoastal", will very much appreciate the availability of these flights for business, leisure and/or VFR purposes. Alaska Airlines seemed to be struggling to make the LAX and SFO hubs that it inherited from VX work even before the pandemic - and hasn't AS fully suspended LAX-JFK?!?

As if AS and its seemingly vulnerable California hub operations weren't reason enough for UA to resume LAX/SFO-JFK, AA has openly admitted how poorly its Los Angeles and New York City hubs were performing. Again, I think these issues were already readily apparent before the pandemic.. but now is certainly a good time for UA to restore flights that the airline itself says should have never been cut in the first place! Perhaps UA could see AA abandoning JFK-SFO, or AS permanently cutting LAX-JFK. I know I wouldn't be surprised to see those things happen.

As a bonus, this move could even help thwart a WN entry to JFK. After all, any kind of WN service at JFK could dramatically strengthen that carrier's appeal in the Tri-State Area market and cause further headaches for the hub carriers there. At this point, I could even see WN trying to get right back into EWR as part of their new "breadth over depth" strategy. Stranger things have happened!


American hasn't publicly admitted that LAX and NYC were performing "poorly" before the pandemic. For NY, and JFK in particular, which isn't a hub at all and has not been for years (and operates as a focus operation) it turned profitable in 2019 as AA transitioned the long haul flying it has (LHR, CDG, MAD, BCN, MXP, FCO, GRU, GIG, EZE) to one aircraft type, the 777, with more cargo capacity, an arguably consistent premium product (except for the fact that some 772s have the rocking seats), and all planes with Premium Economy, allowing them to, at the time, charge a premium. Having flown AA 10 times across the Atlantic and back from JFK throughout 2019, I can tell you the flights were full, the service was markedly improved, and the T8 experience is a welcome relief from T1 and T4 which are overcrowded, and T7 which is just terrible (all pre-pandemic, of course). LAX has been a problem for AA, just like it is for everyone else. High O&D, high premium market, but so much competition. What has not worked for AA at LAX is not the operation itself, but the TPAC piece, and specifically, Asia. HKG, PVG and PEK are all axed. The future of AA's TPAC at LAX rests around SYD, AKL, and maybe MEL one day, plus HND. That is all it needs to be, really. AA isn't likely to abandon SFO from JFK. It will, if anything, see a boost, should AS exit, which seems even more likely now that UA is getting back in. The same goes for LAX (as it relates to AS). AS is not competitive on LAX/SFO from JFK and has no interest in being so. What AS will likely do is move from T7 to T8, fly to SEA, PDX, and maybe SAN, and AA can code share, reducing the need for AA to fly its own aircraft on those routes, which have been largely on and off for over a year (PDX being the exception as it is not on the AA route map from JFK anyway) and AA will want to shift the 737s to DFW/CLT and other hubs.
 
codc10
Posts: 3149
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Fri Nov 13, 2020 4:30 pm

T5towbar wrote:
tphuang wrote:
RyanairGuru wrote:

There’s a chance they already have. United gave up their port-owned (but United exclusive use) gates at EWR to make way for B6.

I wouldn’t rule out a three way agreement between PANYNJ, United and JetBlue where B6 got some additional gates at EWR and in return United get a couple of gates at the expanded T5.


That's certainly possible, but my guess is that B6 got those gates (like NK got its new gate) because it was willing to expand and EWR gates are sitting unused. Long term, UA's desired footprint at JFK would probably require around 15 to 20 slot pairs, up to 4 gates, lounge space, large check in area (including separate check in for premium passengers), crew rest area and real estate to operate all the larger mainline aircraft. That's a pretty large requirement. I doubt that's something traded for just a couple of unused UAX gates.

We will see where JetBlue is in a couple of years, but T7 tenants are scheduled to move out in 2023 for demolition. If JetBlue presses ahead with its current plan, UA has over 2 years to figure out where they go.



Well I was over there (A-2), Monday, and they are repainting and re-striping the ACZ (ramp) for mainline type aircraft. I'm pretty sure that B6 will be using those gates 20; 21; 22; and 23. As I said before, they can use those gates right now with minimal disruption, since A-20 jetway can be shut down and everything else shifted over to accommodate mainline aircraft. I also think that A-23 can handle a A321 as well. Also, those 4 gates are very close to their BMU as well. I don't know what kind of work they are doing upstairs though. From what I understand, they haven't given up A-24 thru A-28. UAX still parks there - as well as mainline, and a lot of unused GSE remains there on the front hardstand. But the bus hold room is closed. But I wouldn't put it past them to come up with an agreement to use some of those gates as well. The terminal only has something like a year and a half left, so who knows.......

Looks like we won't be coming back over to A until the new terminal gets built.


A24-28 are exclusive-use UA gates and UA would be under no obligation to relinquish them for lack of use. A20-23, on the other hand, are PANYNJ gates that were UA-preferential, meaning UA can be forced to give them up if they don’t meet usage (by turn) thresholds. UA is in the process of removing its owned equipment (interior, PCA, bridges, GPUs) and will be replaced by PA equipment.

My understanding is that UA did not cede these gates under duress, but rather this was part of a broader resource allocation deal between UA, AS, B6 and the Port, reshuffling the deck on underused common-use space. No coincidence that UA announces it is getting back into JFK around the same time the rest of this goes into motion.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6448
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Fri Nov 13, 2020 5:21 pm

codc10 wrote:

A24-28 are exclusive-use UA gates and UA would be under no obligation to relinquish them for lack of use. A20-23, on the other hand, are PANYNJ gates that were UA-preferential, meaning UA can be forced to give them up if they don’t meet usage (by turn) thresholds. UA is in the process of removing its owned equipment (interior, PCA, bridges, GPUs) and will be replaced by PA equipment.

My understanding is that UA did not cede these gates under duress, but rather this was part of a broader resource allocation deal between UA, AS, B6 and the Port, reshuffling the deck on underused common-use space. No coincidence that UA announces it is getting back into JFK around the same time the rest of this goes into motion.


I buy that this was part of a larger deal to provide UA with some spaces to operate out of JFK.

The problem is that UA needs more than this temporary solution to offer a product that's compelling out of JFK. It does need more slots. It does need more spaces for dedicated premium check-in, lounge and seating space/restaurants around the gates it operated out of. It does need widebody capable spaces. All these are things that will make its JFK return more likely to succeed long term. It's not going to get any of that until it works something out with JetBlue or AA or Delta. And as I have said all along, JetBlue is more likely to work something out with UA than the DL/AA. UA has a couple of years, but it will need to figure out how to get into a better position at JFK.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3511
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Fri Nov 13, 2020 7:32 pm

CALMSP wrote:
jayunited wrote:
trueblew wrote:
Everyone is waxing lyrical about these high-J configs and corporate contracts etc etc.... but where are the hordes of J customers and corporate travelers to fill them? It's mostly Group 4-5 pax currently and will likely still be when this route launches.



No one is saying UA will fill 46 Polaris seats with paying customers, no one is making that assertion. What people are saying is because these routes are very competitive UA really has no choice. Back in April and May UA on our EWR-SFO/LAX routes replace our lie flat seats with 738s and 739ERs a cost cutting move. However that move backfired and cost UA dearly by the time June came around UA has replaced 738s and 739ERs with RR 752s, 763s, 789s and 78Xs. Even though we are still in the middle of a pandemic and business travel remains down these routes NYC-LAX/SFO are still as competitive as ever and launching these routes with anything other than lie flat seats would be a disaster for UA. Everyone knows for now business class ticket prices are near all time lows on these routes but again because of the nature of these routes and competition an airline like UA can't put any other aircraft on these routes.

Sure UA could use our 169 seats RR 752s but you've just eliminated your ability to carry large amounts of cargo. Launching these routes with a 763 at least gives UA the opportunity to carry 30,000 LBS or more of cargo on each flight in each direction.



What backfired by moving to smaller a/c during a time when no one is flying? This is more of a situation where some other routes have been reinstated and the 737's are going there and then running larger planes between the coasts. PAX numbers do not require any larger a/c right now based on the boarding totals. 250 open seats on a 777?



That isn't true at all here we are in November and UA still has 25 739ER, and 17 738s in storage. Back in June when UA reinstated lie flat seats we were only operating 3x daily EWR-SFO and 2x daily EWR-LAX back in May going into June UA had over 60 frames of each fleet type (739ER and 738) in storage so this was't a case of UA needed 737s on other routes UA has plenty of 737s. But again UA brought back lie flat seating in June because we were the only airline (outside of Alaska and I'm not sure AS was even operating JFK-SFO/LAX at the time) flying NYC-SFO/LAX without lie flat seats.

Kirby even admitted it was a mistake removing lie flat seating from these routes, he underestimated how competitive these routes still were even though we are in a pandemic. By May 2020 all of UA 752s including the RR engine fleet were all in long term storage at ROW or INT. There were rampant rumors that the RR engined 752s would never fly again. UA originally pulled 7 frames out of storage now 13 RR 752 have been returned to service.

One last point you say PAX numbers do not require any larger aircraft I glad you brought that up because several people myself included have already pointed out that UA's high J 763s have less seats on them than our 739ERs and the high J 763s have 167 seats while UA's 738s have 166 seats.
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Fri Nov 13, 2020 7:57 pm

jayunited wrote:
CALMSP wrote:
jayunited wrote:


No one is saying UA will fill 46 Polaris seats with paying customers, no one is making that assertion. What people are saying is because these routes are very competitive UA really has no choice. Back in April and May UA on our EWR-SFO/LAX routes replace our lie flat seats with 738s and 739ERs a cost cutting move. However that move backfired and cost UA dearly by the time June came around UA has replaced 738s and 739ERs with RR 752s, 763s, 789s and 78Xs. Even though we are still in the middle of a pandemic and business travel remains down these routes NYC-LAX/SFO are still as competitive as ever and launching these routes with anything other than lie flat seats would be a disaster for UA. Everyone knows for now business class ticket prices are near all time lows on these routes but again because of the nature of these routes and competition an airline like UA can't put any other aircraft on these routes.

Sure UA could use our 169 seats RR 752s but you've just eliminated your ability to carry large amounts of cargo. Launching these routes with a 763 at least gives UA the opportunity to carry 30,000 LBS or more of cargo on each flight in each direction.



What backfired by moving to smaller a/c during a time when no one is flying? This is more of a situation where some other routes have been reinstated and the 737's are going there and then running larger planes between the coasts. PAX numbers do not require any larger a/c right now based on the boarding totals. 250 open seats on a 777?



That isn't true at all here we are in November and UA still has 25 739ER, and 17 738s in storage. Back in June when UA reinstated lie flat seats we were only operating 3x daily EWR-SFO and 2x daily EWR-LAX back in May going into June UA had over 60 frames of each fleet type (739ER and 738) in storage so this was't a case of UA needed 737s on other routes UA has plenty of 737s. But again UA brought back lie flat seating in June because we were the only airline (outside of Alaska and I'm not sure AS was even operating JFK-SFO/LAX at the time) flying NYC-SFO/LAX without lie flat seats.

Kirby even admitted it was a mistake removing lie flat seating from these routes, he underestimated how competitive these routes still were even though we are in a pandemic. By May 2020 all of UA 752s including the RR engine fleet were all in long term storage at ROW or INT. There were rampant rumors that the RR engined 752s would never fly again. UA originally pulled 7 frames out of storage now 13 RR 752 have been returned to service.

One last point you say PAX numbers do not require any larger aircraft I glad you brought that up because several people myself included have already pointed out that UA's high J 763s have less seats on them than our 739ERs and the high J 763s have 167 seats while UA's 738s have 166 seats.


I'm not questioning the total seats on the planes, I'm just saying EWR-west coast is empty already, adding JFK-SFO/LAX in a market where people basically can't do anything in those states is going to be rough!
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:16 pm

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
With United losing $25 million a day i don't think returning to JFK is a priority for them. I think they will need a real recovery already start before they consider a return.

I would doubt you really KNOW what's important to UA, Only what you hope is important to UA. I've been retired almost 4 years from United and they talked about it 3 years BEFORE I retired and the Noise has only gotten Louder Since I retired as they still have CSR's and Maintenance still ASSIGNED AND WORKING AT JFK on behalf of the Star Alliance partners who still fly into JFK, JFK actually would like United to come back as they lost some clout as many Star Alliance flights Re-Routed to EWR to connect with United flights there. So? Of Course JFK would like them back, It stands to reason. If the problem is gate and terminal space for United to return TO JFK?
I'll bet that would get solved PDQ!! I can see that some might NOT want United to return to JFK like the Camel's nose under the tent flap. BUT? If United really intends to return to JFK? They Might well have to get over it. as to do it? United will have to commit to it and not just Speculate about it.
 
codc10
Posts: 3149
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 1:35 am

tphuang wrote:
codc10 wrote:

A24-28 are exclusive-use UA gates and UA would be under no obligation to relinquish them for lack of use. A20-23, on the other hand, are PANYNJ gates that were UA-preferential, meaning UA can be forced to give them up if they don’t meet usage (by turn) thresholds. UA is in the process of removing its owned equipment (interior, PCA, bridges, GPUs) and will be replaced by PA equipment.

My understanding is that UA did not cede these gates under duress, but rather this was part of a broader resource allocation deal between UA, AS, B6 and the Port, reshuffling the deck on underused common-use space. No coincidence that UA announces it is getting back into JFK around the same time the rest of this goes into motion.


I buy that this was part of a larger deal to provide UA with some spaces to operate out of JFK.

The problem is that UA needs more than this temporary solution to offer a product that's compelling out of JFK. It does need more slots. It does need more spaces for dedicated premium check-in, lounge and seating space/restaurants around the gates it operated out of. It does need widebody capable spaces. All these are things that will make its JFK return more likely to succeed long term. It's not going to get any of that until it works something out with JetBlue or AA or Delta. And as I have said all along, JetBlue is more likely to work something out with UA than the DL/AA. UA has a couple of years, but it will need to figure out how to get into a better position at JFK.


In terms of real estate, UA doesn’t have to work anything out with Delta for Terminal 4, which (unless the T1 plan ever comes to fruition) is its anticipated long-term home following the T4A expansion. Delta is a tenant, substantially - but not all - on an exclusive basis, of JFKIAT, which is the private company that developed T4 in the late 90s.

Like I’ve said, I can’t envision a direct competitor voluntarily shacking up with a new entrant on what is by many accounts the most lucrative (pre-COVID) domestic market. UA in T7 is a temporary space but there are long term options that don’t involve an agreement that, for lack of a better term, results in an airline letting the proverbial wolf into its henhouse. That’s not to say United will be dominant when it enters, far from it, but I think we all can agree that the incumbent carriers would much prefer UA stay on its side of the Hudson, and aren’t going to be rolling out the red carpet (pun intended) to help it regain a toehold in the JFK transcons.
 
LondonXtreme
Posts: 164
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2018 4:24 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 4:03 am

strfyr51 wrote:
slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
With United losing $25 million a day i don't think returning to JFK is a priority for them. I think they will need a real recovery already start before they consider a return.

I would doubt you really KNOW what's important to UA, Only what you hope is important to UA. I've been retired almost 4 years from United and they talked about it 3 years BEFORE I retired and the Noise has only gotten Louder Since I retired as they still have CSR's and Maintenance still ASSIGNED AND WORKING AT JFK on behalf of the Star Alliance partners who still fly into JFK, JFK actually would like United to come back as they lost some clout as many Star Alliance flights Re-Routed to EWR to connect with United flights there. So? Of Course JFK would like them back, It stands to reason. If the problem is gate and terminal space for United to return TO JFK?
I'll bet that would get solved PDQ!! I can see that some might NOT want United to return to JFK like the Camel's nose under the tent flap. BUT? If United really intends to return to JFK? They Might well have to get over it. as to do it? United will have to commit to it and not just Speculate about it.

The thing I confuse is that why Star Alliance need UA at JFK. The only 2 routes UA used to and will serve from JFK are LAX/SFO. Most of star alliance partner airlines at JFK are also serving LAX/SFO.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2268
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 12:27 pm

LondonXtreme wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
With United losing $25 million a day i don't think returning to JFK is a priority for them. I think they will need a real recovery already start before they consider a return.

I would doubt you really KNOW what's important to UA, Only what you hope is important to UA. I've been retired almost 4 years from United and they talked about it 3 years BEFORE I retired and the Noise has only gotten Louder Since I retired as they still have CSR's and Maintenance still ASSIGNED AND WORKING AT JFK on behalf of the Star Alliance partners who still fly into JFK, JFK actually would like United to come back as they lost some clout as many Star Alliance flights Re-Routed to EWR to connect with United flights there. So? Of Course JFK would like them back, It stands to reason. If the problem is gate and terminal space for United to return TO JFK?
I'll bet that would get solved PDQ!! I can see that some might NOT want United to return to JFK like the Camel's nose under the tent flap. BUT? If United really intends to return to JFK? They Might well have to get over it. as to do it? United will have to commit to it and not just Speculate about it.

The thing I confuse is that why Star Alliance need UA at JFK. The only 2 routes UA used to and will serve from JFK are LAX/SFO. Most of star alliance partner airlines at JFK are also serving LAX/SFO.


Star Alliance does not need UA at JFK. Every major Star route out of JFK is essentially O&D. If you look at the pre-COVID map, UA can move passengers onto Star flights, and vice versa directly from SFO and LAX, without sending people to JFK, and the premium revenue stream just is not large enough to generate anything meaningful for UA to flow traffic at JFK onto LH, OS, etc..UA can realize some cost savings by co-locating with a few Star carriers at JFK, eventually, but T1 is not set up for domestic operations, is slated to be demolished at some point as it is too small for what it ended up servicing (as DL pushed so many carriers out of T4). UA at JFK will not extend to DEN and ORD. There's no need for that. It can fly those routes (and does) from LGA multiple times daily and from a brand new terminal with a much improved passenger experience and a United Club too. JFK for UA is going to be LAX/SFO and that's it. It needs to be there to be relevant in the most lucrative domestic market in the US. Most of the transit-able services on Star for UA are all available at EWR. UA will remain in T7 until it can no longer operate there, and then will cut a deal with B6 to fly from the expanded T5. By then, the industry should have recovered and B6 will consumed by either UA or AA but that's a long, long way from happening.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3511
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 2:09 pm

CALMSP wrote:
jayunited wrote:
CALMSP wrote:


What backfired by moving to smaller a/c during a time when no one is flying? This is more of a situation where some other routes have been reinstated and the 737's are going there and then running larger planes between the coasts. PAX numbers do not require any larger a/c right now based on the boarding totals. 250 open seats on a 777?



That isn't true at all here we are in November and UA still has 25 739ER, and 17 738s in storage. Back in June when UA reinstated lie flat seats we were only operating 3x daily EWR-SFO and 2x daily EWR-LAX back in May going into June UA had over 60 frames of each fleet type (739ER and 738) in storage so this was't a case of UA needed 737s on other routes UA has plenty of 737s. But again UA brought back lie flat seating in June because we were the only airline (outside of Alaska and I'm not sure AS was even operating JFK-SFO/LAX at the time) flying NYC-SFO/LAX without lie flat seats.

Kirby even admitted it was a mistake removing lie flat seating from these routes, he underestimated how competitive these routes still were even though we are in a pandemic. By May 2020 all of UA 752s including the RR engine fleet were all in long term storage at ROW or INT. There were rampant rumors that the RR engined 752s would never fly again. UA originally pulled 7 frames out of storage now 13 RR 752 have been returned to service.

One last point you say PAX numbers do not require any larger aircraft I glad you brought that up because several people myself included have already pointed out that UA's high J 763s have less seats on them than our 739ERs and the high J 763s have 167 seats while UA's 738s have 166 seats.


I'm not questioning the total seats on the planes, I'm just saying EWR-west coast is empty already, adding JFK-SFO/LAX in a market where people basically can't do anything in those states is going to be rough!


Have you seen UA's cargo numbers for the past two quarters? In Q3 UA's cargo numbers were up nearly 50%.

UA already has established cargo operations at LAX, SFO and we still have our warehouse at JFK (we've just been trucking cargo to/from EWR). While every seat on these high J 763 will not be filled I can promise you this the belly of the aircraft will be. In an earlier post you brought up empty 772s, you are correct there are a lot of empty seats but the belly of the beast is full of cargo. I'm not sure how to better explain this or have people understand why UA is launching these routes with this aircraft.

People continue to simply focus on the the aircraft a 763, instead of digging deeper and realizing UA isn't flooding the market with an over abundance of capacity (this isn't a 200+ seat aircraft we are using) but at the same time a 763 can carry a lot more cargo than any 738, 739ER, or 752 ever could.
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 2:47 pm

jayunited wrote:
CALMSP wrote:
jayunited wrote:


That isn't true at all here we are in November and UA still has 25 739ER, and 17 738s in storage. Back in June when UA reinstated lie flat seats we were only operating 3x daily EWR-SFO and 2x daily EWR-LAX back in May going into June UA had over 60 frames of each fleet type (739ER and 738) in storage so this was't a case of UA needed 737s on other routes UA has plenty of 737s. But again UA brought back lie flat seating in June because we were the only airline (outside of Alaska and I'm not sure AS was even operating JFK-SFO/LAX at the time) flying NYC-SFO/LAX without lie flat seats.

Kirby even admitted it was a mistake removing lie flat seating from these routes, he underestimated how competitive these routes still were even though we are in a pandemic. By May 2020 all of UA 752s including the RR engine fleet were all in long term storage at ROW or INT. There were rampant rumors that the RR engined 752s would never fly again. UA originally pulled 7 frames out of storage now 13 RR 752 have been returned to service.

One last point you say PAX numbers do not require any larger aircraft I glad you brought that up because several people myself included have already pointed out that UA's high J 763s have less seats on them than our 739ERs and the high J 763s have 167 seats while UA's 738s have 166 seats.


I'm not questioning the total seats on the planes, I'm just saying EWR-west coast is empty already, adding JFK-SFO/LAX in a market where people basically can't do anything in those states is going to be rough!


Have you seen UA's cargo numbers for the past two quarters? In Q3 UA's cargo numbers were up nearly 50%.

UA already has established cargo operations at LAX, SFO and we still have our warehouse at JFK (we've just been trucking cargo to/from EWR). While every seat on these high J 763 will not be filled I can promise you this the belly of the aircraft will be. In an earlier post you brought up empty 772s, you are correct there are a lot of empty seats but the belly of the beast is full of cargo. I'm not sure how to better explain this or have people understand why UA is launching these routes with this aircraft.

People continue to simply focus on the the aircraft a 763, instead of digging deeper and realizing UA isn't flooding the market with an over abundance of capacity (this isn't a 200+ seat aircraft we are using) but at the same time a 763 can carry a lot more cargo than any 738, 739ER, or 752 ever could.


I'm not nagging on the 767, just saying the pax demand is not there. Cargo will be an option, but hte majority of cargo is still going to be trucked to EWR/IAD.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6448
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 5:00 pm

codc10 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
codc10 wrote:

A24-28 are exclusive-use UA gates and UA would be under no obligation to relinquish them for lack of use. A20-23, on the other hand, are PANYNJ gates that were UA-preferential, meaning UA can be forced to give them up if they don’t meet usage (by turn) thresholds. UA is in the process of removing its owned equipment (interior, PCA, bridges, GPUs) and will be replaced by PA equipment.

My understanding is that UA did not cede these gates under duress, but rather this was part of a broader resource allocation deal between UA, AS, B6 and the Port, reshuffling the deck on underused common-use space. No coincidence that UA announces it is getting back into JFK around the same time the rest of this goes into motion.


I buy that this was part of a larger deal to provide UA with some spaces to operate out of JFK.

The problem is that UA needs more than this temporary solution to offer a product that's compelling out of JFK. It does need more slots. It does need more spaces for dedicated premium check-in, lounge and seating space/restaurants around the gates it operated out of. It does need widebody capable spaces. All these are things that will make its JFK return more likely to succeed long term. It's not going to get any of that until it works something out with JetBlue or AA or Delta. And as I have said all along, JetBlue is more likely to work something out with UA than the DL/AA. UA has a couple of years, but it will need to figure out how to get into a better position at JFK.


In terms of real estate, UA doesn’t have to work anything out with Delta for Terminal 4, which (unless the T1 plan ever comes to fruition) is its anticipated long-term home following the T4A expansion. Delta is a tenant, substantially - but not all - on an exclusive basis, of JFKIAT, which is the private company that developed T4 in the late 90s.

Like I’ve said, I can’t envision a direct competitor voluntarily shacking up with a new entrant on what is by many accounts the most lucrative (pre-COVID) domestic market. UA in T7 is a temporary space but there are long term options that don’t involve an agreement that, for lack of a better term, results in an airline letting the proverbial wolf into its henhouse. That’s not to say United will be dominant when it enters, far from it, but I think we all can agree that the incumbent carriers would much prefer UA stay on its side of the Hudson, and aren’t going to be rolling out the red carpet (pun intended) to help it regain a toehold in the JFK transcons.


If T1 project gets delayed, then DL gets to keep T2 for a while longer. It has no need for T4A expansion. And given how much money it has spent on LGA, LAX and SLC recently, it might not want to spend more on expanding JFK if international travel is slow returning. T-4 is probably the long term home for UA if it doesn't work anything else out. But DL will do everything it can to make UA's life hard in there. The new T-1 will be an option if it ever gets built. But can you imagine the cost to have 3 to 4 preferential gate there + all the real estate that UA would need?

I don't think JetBlue will mind UA's presence in JFK as much as DL/AA. As long as UA is willing to trade something worthwhile in return, a deal could be reached.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 6425
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 6:04 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
LondonXtreme wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
I would doubt you really KNOW what's important to UA, Only what you hope is important to UA. I've been retired almost 4 years from United and they talked about it 3 years BEFORE I retired and the Noise has only gotten Louder Since I retired as they still have CSR's and Maintenance still ASSIGNED AND WORKING AT JFK on behalf of the Star Alliance partners who still fly into JFK, JFK actually would like United to come back as they lost some clout as many Star Alliance flights Re-Routed to EWR to connect with United flights there. So? Of Course JFK would like them back, It stands to reason. If the problem is gate and terminal space for United to return TO JFK?
I'll bet that would get solved PDQ!! I can see that some might NOT want United to return to JFK like the Camel's nose under the tent flap. BUT? If United really intends to return to JFK? They Might well have to get over it. as to do it? United will have to commit to it and not just Speculate about it.

The thing I confuse is that why Star Alliance need UA at JFK. The only 2 routes UA used to and will serve from JFK are LAX/SFO. Most of star alliance partner airlines at JFK are also serving LAX/SFO.


Star Alliance does not need UA at JFK. Every major Star route out of JFK is essentially O&D. If you look at the pre-COVID map, UA can move passengers onto Star flights, and vice versa directly from SFO and LAX, without sending people to JFK, and the premium revenue stream just is not large enough to generate anything meaningful for UA to flow traffic at JFK onto LH, OS, etc..UA can realize some cost savings by co-locating with a few Star carriers at JFK, eventually, but T1 is not set up for domestic operations, is slated to be demolished at some point as it is too small for what it ended up servicing (as DL pushed so many carriers out of T4). UA at JFK will not extend to DEN and ORD. There's no need for that. It can fly those routes (and does) from LGA multiple times daily and from a brand new terminal with a much improved passenger experience and a United Club too. JFK for UA is going to be LAX/SFO and that's it. It needs to be there to be relevant in the most lucrative domestic market in the US. Most of the transit-able services on Star for UA are all available at EWR. UA will remain in T7 until it can no longer operate there, and then will cut a deal with B6 to fly from the expanded T5. By then, the industry should have recovered and B6 will consumed by either UA or AA but that's a long, long way from happening.



But UA themselves has publicly said they intend to serve IAH and DEN from JFK.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 6:48 pm

jfklganyc wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
LondonXtreme wrote:
The thing I confuse is that why Star Alliance need UA at JFK. The only 2 routes UA used to and will serve from JFK are LAX/SFO. Most of star alliance partner airlines at JFK are also serving LAX/SFO.


Star Alliance does not need UA at JFK. Every major Star route out of JFK is essentially O&D. If you look at the pre-COVID map, UA can move passengers onto Star flights, and vice versa directly from SFO and LAX, without sending people to JFK, and the premium revenue stream just is not large enough to generate anything meaningful for UA to flow traffic at JFK onto LH, OS, etc..UA can realize some cost savings by co-locating with a few Star carriers at JFK, eventually, but T1 is not set up for domestic operations, is slated to be demolished at some point as it is too small for what it ended up servicing (as DL pushed so many carriers out of T4). UA at JFK will not extend to DEN and ORD. There's no need for that. It can fly those routes (and does) from LGA multiple times daily and from a brand new terminal with a much improved passenger experience and a United Club too. JFK for UA is going to be LAX/SFO and that's it. It needs to be there to be relevant in the most lucrative domestic market in the US. Most of the transit-able services on Star for UA are all available at EWR. UA will remain in T7 until it can no longer operate there, and then will cut a deal with B6 to fly from the expanded T5. By then, the industry should have recovered and B6 will consumed by either UA or AA but that's a long, long way from happening.



But UA themselves has publicly said they intend to serve IAH and DEN from JFK.


That doesn't matter. If the Monday morning quarterbacks at Airliners.net say it won't happen then it won't.
 
Seat1D
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2020 8:55 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 6:57 pm

jfklganyc wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
LondonXtreme wrote:
The thing I confuse is that why Star Alliance need UA at JFK. The only 2 routes UA used to and will serve from JFK are LAX/SFO. Most of star alliance partner airlines at JFK are also serving LAX/SFO.


Star Alliance does not need UA at JFK. Every major Star route out of JFK is essentially O&D. If you look at the pre-COVID map, UA can move passengers onto Star flights, and vice versa directly from SFO and LAX, without sending people to JFK, and the premium revenue stream just is not large enough to generate anything meaningful for UA to flow traffic at JFK onto LH, OS, etc..UA can realize some cost savings by co-locating with a few Star carriers at JFK, eventually, but T1 is not set up for domestic operations, is slated to be demolished at some point as it is too small for what it ended up servicing (as DL pushed so many carriers out of T4). UA at JFK will not extend to DEN and ORD. There's no need for that. It can fly those routes (and does) from LGA multiple times daily and from a brand new terminal with a much improved passenger experience and a United Club too. JFK for UA is going to be LAX/SFO and that's it. It needs to be there to be relevant in the most lucrative domestic market in the US. Most of the transit-able services on Star for UA are all available at EWR. UA will remain in T7 until it can no longer operate there, and then will cut a deal with B6 to fly from the expanded T5. By then, the industry should have recovered and B6 will consumed by either UA or AA but that's a long, long way from happening.



But UA themselves has publicly said they intend to serve IAH and DEN from JFK.


If UA publicly said this, then can you please post a link? I did a quick Google search and wasn't able to find anything. Thanks
 
marcogr12
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2018 2:36 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 7:54 pm

Norwegian will soon be forced to downsize considerably without any more governmental financial backing..Word has it that they will shrink to just Scandinavian routes and european with just 6 737..That being the case their JFK and other US flights will go out of the window..If so, could UA get Nowegian's slots at JFK and expand?
Flying is breathing..no planes no life..
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2268
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 7:59 pm

marcogr12 wrote:
Norwegian will soon be forced to downsize considerably without any more governmental financial backing..Word has it that they will shrink to just Scandinavian routes and european with just 6 737..That being the case their JFK and other US flights will go out of the window..If so, could UA get Nowegian's slots at JFK and expand?


DY is the next AB.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 6425
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 8:38 pm

Seat1D wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:

Star Alliance does not need UA at JFK. Every major Star route out of JFK is essentially O&D. If you look at the pre-COVID map, UA can move passengers onto Star flights, and vice versa directly from SFO and LAX, without sending people to JFK, and the premium revenue stream just is not large enough to generate anything meaningful for UA to flow traffic at JFK onto LH, OS, etc..UA can realize some cost savings by co-locating with a few Star carriers at JFK, eventually, but T1 is not set up for domestic operations, is slated to be demolished at some point as it is too small for what it ended up servicing (as DL pushed so many carriers out of T4). UA at JFK will not extend to DEN and ORD. There's no need for that. It can fly those routes (and does) from LGA multiple times daily and from a brand new terminal with a much improved passenger experience and a United Club too. JFK for UA is going to be LAX/SFO and that's it. It needs to be there to be relevant in the most lucrative domestic market in the US. Most of the transit-able services on Star for UA are all available at EWR. UA will remain in T7 until it can no longer operate there, and then will cut a deal with B6 to fly from the expanded T5. By then, the industry should have recovered and B6 will consumed by either UA or AA but that's a long, long way from happening.



But UA themselves has publicly said they intend to serve IAH and DEN from JFK.


If UA publicly said this, then can you please post a link? I did a quick Google search and wasn't able to find anything. Thanks[/

“Our goal is to expand [our coast-to-coast] service first and then move on to our other gateways to be able to connect passengers through Chicago, Denver, Houston, in particular,” said Ankit Gupta, United’s vice president for domestic network planning.

https://www.afar.com/magazine/united-is ... fk-airport
 
User avatar
Aisak
Posts: 943
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:56 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Nov 14, 2020 11:56 pm

tphuang wrote:
codc10 wrote:
tphuang wrote:

I buy that this was part of a larger deal to provide UA with some spaces to operate out of JFK.

The problem is that UA needs more than this temporary solution to offer a product that's compelling out of JFK. It does need more slots. It does need more spaces for dedicated premium check-in, lounge and seating space/restaurants around the gates it operated out of. It does need widebody capable spaces. All these are things that will make its JFK return more likely to succeed long term. It's not going to get any of that until it works something out with JetBlue or AA or Delta. And as I have said all along, JetBlue is more likely to work something out with UA than the DL/AA. UA has a couple of years, but it will need to figure out how to get into a better position at JFK.


In terms of real estate, UA doesn’t have to work anything out with Delta for Terminal 4, which (unless the T1 plan ever comes to fruition) is its anticipated long-term home following the T4A expansion. Delta is a tenant, substantially - but not all - on an exclusive basis, of JFKIAT, which is the private company that developed T4 in the late 90s.

Like I’ve said, I can’t envision a direct competitor voluntarily shacking up with a new entrant on what is by many accounts the most lucrative (pre-COVID) domestic market. UA in T7 is a temporary space but there are long term options that don’t involve an agreement that, for lack of a better term, results in an airline letting the proverbial wolf into its henhouse. That’s not to say United will be dominant when it enters, far from it, but I think we all can agree that the incumbent carriers would much prefer UA stay on its side of the Hudson, and aren’t going to be rolling out the red carpet (pun intended) to help it regain a toehold in the JFK transcons.


If T1 project gets delayed, then DL gets to keep T2 for a while longer. It has no need for T4A expansion. And given how much money it has spent on LGA, LAX and SLC recently, it might not want to spend more on expanding JFK if international travel is slow returning. T-4 is probably the long term home for UA if it doesn't work anything else out. But DL will do everything it can to make UA's life hard in there. The new T-1 will be an option if it ever gets built. But can you imagine the cost to have 3 to 4 preferential gate there + all the real estate that UA would need?

The future of the new Terminal ONE is quite uncertain. Not in terms of “(when) will it be built?”, as I’m sure it will, but what airlines it will house.

The Terminal ONE will not only replace the 11-gate current T1, but also T2 and former T3. And all that space/mega building will be managed by TOGA (AF-KE-LH-JL). What will be this consortium’s plan to let airlines in? DL currently uses T2 and in a post covid era, all that space will be needed. Where will Delta find it? Will there be an expansion of T4A or will Delta take over the whole east pier of T-ONE if it’s built (2023) in time for T2 demo?
If I’m Delta I would prefer to house all operations under one terminal even if T4 and T-ONE west are linked.
That factor will limit who (and how) can move into T-ONE.
West pier and T1 cannot coexist so the owners of TOGA need to secure at least 11 gates at the east pier to ensure the same levels of operation than precovid 2019.

Even though I’d love to see UA along JV transatlantic partner LH and whoever joins in from Star, reality just kicks in. T-ONE will be a 100% international terminal
https://www.anewjfk.com/wp-content/uplo ... web-V3.pdf

I don’t mean two/three gates can have their arrivals directed to a small domestic arrivals, so domestic UA/precleared AC can dock in. But it’s just bizarre how terminals/airports fight to be FIS-capable and this is just the opposite
 
maverick4002
Posts: 436
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2015 2:14 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 1:46 am

Aisak wrote:
tphuang wrote:
codc10 wrote:

In terms of real estate, UA doesn’t have to work anything out with Delta for Terminal 4, which (unless the T1 plan ever comes to fruition) is its anticipated long-term home following the T4A expansion. Delta is a tenant, substantially - but not all - on an exclusive basis, of JFKIAT, which is the private company that developed T4 in the late 90s.

Like I’ve said, I can’t envision a direct competitor voluntarily shacking up with a new entrant on what is by many accounts the most lucrative (pre-COVID) domestic market. UA in T7 is a temporary space but there are long term options that don’t involve an agreement that, for lack of a better term, results in an airline letting the proverbial wolf into its henhouse. That’s not to say United will be dominant when it enters, far from it, but I think we all can agree that the incumbent carriers would much prefer UA stay on its side of the Hudson, and aren’t going to be rolling out the red carpet (pun intended) to help it regain a toehold in the JFK transcons.


If T1 project gets delayed, then DL gets to keep T2 for a while longer. It has no need for T4A expansion. And given how much money it has spent on LGA, LAX and SLC recently, it might not want to spend more on expanding JFK if international travel is slow returning. T-4 is probably the long term home for UA if it doesn't work anything else out. But DL will do everything it can to make UA's life hard in there. The new T-1 will be an option if it ever gets built. But can you imagine the cost to have 3 to 4 preferential gate there + all the real estate that UA would need?

The future of the new Terminal ONE is quite uncertain. Not in terms of “(when) will it be built?”, as I’m sure it will, but what airlines it will house.

The Terminal ONE will not only replace the 11-gate current T1, but also T2 and former T3. And all that space/mega building will be managed by TOGA (AF-KE-LH-JL). What will be this consortium’s plan to let airlines in? DL currently uses T2 and in a post covid era, all that space will be needed. Where will Delta find it? Will there be an expansion of T4A or will Delta take over the whole east pier of T-ONE if it’s built (2023) in time for T2 demo?
If I’m Delta I would prefer to house all operations under one terminal even if T4 and T-ONE west are linked.
That factor will limit who (and how) can move into T-ONE.
West pier and T1 cannot coexist so the owners of TOGA need to secure at least 11 gates at the east pier to ensure the same levels of operation than precovid 2019.

Even though I’d love to see UA along JV transatlantic partner LH and whoever joins in from Star, reality just kicks in. T-ONE will be a 100% international terminal
https://www.anewjfk.com/wp-content/uplo ... web-V3.pdf

I don’t mean two/three gates can have their arrivals directed to a small domestic arrivals, so domestic UA/precleared AC can dock in. But it’s just bizarre how terminals/airports fight to be FIS-capable and this is just the opposite


That very link you posted says it will have 23 gates, up from the 11 now. Thats almost double. AF-KE can take the part closest to T4 and that will still leave AMPLE room for other airlines to move in. Where exactly do you think they other airlines in T4 now will go once Delta takes over? They need to end up somewhere.
 
codc10
Posts: 3149
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 11:57 am

tphuang wrote:
codc10 wrote:
tphuang wrote:

I buy that this was part of a larger deal to provide UA with some spaces to operate out of JFK.

The problem is that UA needs more than this temporary solution to offer a product that's compelling out of JFK. It does need more slots. It does need more spaces for dedicated premium check-in, lounge and seating space/restaurants around the gates it operated out of. It does need widebody capable spaces. All these are things that will make its JFK return more likely to succeed long term. It's not going to get any of that until it works something out with JetBlue or AA or Delta. And as I have said all along, JetBlue is more likely to work something out with UA than the DL/AA. UA has a couple of years, but it will need to figure out how to get into a better position at JFK.


In terms of real estate, UA doesn’t have to work anything out with Delta for Terminal 4, which (unless the T1 plan ever comes to fruition) is its anticipated long-term home following the T4A expansion. Delta is a tenant, substantially - but not all - on an exclusive basis, of JFKIAT, which is the private company that developed T4 in the late 90s.

Like I’ve said, I can’t envision a direct competitor voluntarily shacking up with a new entrant on what is by many accounts the most lucrative (pre-COVID) domestic market. UA in T7 is a temporary space but there are long term options that don’t involve an agreement that, for lack of a better term, results in an airline letting the proverbial wolf into its henhouse. That’s not to say United will be dominant when it enters, far from it, but I think we all can agree that the incumbent carriers would much prefer UA stay on its side of the Hudson, and aren’t going to be rolling out the red carpet (pun intended) to help it regain a toehold in the JFK transcons.


If T1 project gets delayed, then DL gets to keep T2 for a while longer. It has no need for T4A expansion. And given how much money it has spent on LGA, LAX and SLC recently, it might not want to spend more on expanding JFK if international travel is slow returning. T-4 is probably the long term home for UA if it doesn't work anything else out. But DL will do everything it can to make UA's life hard in there. The new T-1 will be an option if it ever gets built. But can you imagine the cost to have 3 to 4 preferential gate there + all the real estate that UA would need?

I don't think JetBlue will mind UA's presence in JFK as much as DL/AA. As long as UA is willing to trade something worthwhile in return, a deal could be reached.


I don’t completely disagree, but in terms of the proposed terminal projects at JFK, T4A is probably the most realistic to complete in the shortest time. At T5, financing and the enabling project of demolishing T7 are obstacles. At T1, it’s a huge undertaking (an all-new facility) for a struggling ownership group and limited need, at the moment. T4A has the fewest hurdles to clear.

Aisak wrote:
tphuang wrote:
codc10 wrote:

In terms of real estate, UA doesn’t have to work anything out with Delta for Terminal 4, which (unless the T1 plan ever comes to fruition) is its anticipated long-term home following the T4A expansion. Delta is a tenant, substantially - but not all - on an exclusive basis, of JFKIAT, which is the private company that developed T4 in the late 90s.

Like I’ve said, I can’t envision a direct competitor voluntarily shacking up with a new entrant on what is by many accounts the most lucrative (pre-COVID) domestic market. UA in T7 is a temporary space but there are long term options that don’t involve an agreement that, for lack of a better term, results in an airline letting the proverbial wolf into its henhouse. That’s not to say United will be dominant when it enters, far from it, but I think we all can agree that the incumbent carriers would much prefer UA stay on its side of the Hudson, and aren’t going to be rolling out the red carpet (pun intended) to help it regain a toehold in the JFK transcons.


If T1 project gets delayed, then DL gets to keep T2 for a while longer. It has no need for T4A expansion. And given how much money it has spent on LGA, LAX and SLC recently, it might not want to spend more on expanding JFK if international travel is slow returning. T-4 is probably the long term home for UA if it doesn't work anything else out. But DL will do everything it can to make UA's life hard in there. The new T-1 will be an option if it ever gets built. But can you imagine the cost to have 3 to 4 preferential gate there + all the real estate that UA would need?

The future of the new Terminal ONE is quite uncertain. Not in terms of “(when) will it be built?”, as I’m sure it will, but what airlines it will house.

The Terminal ONE will not only replace the 11-gate current T1, but also T2 and former T3. And all that space/mega building will be managed by TOGA (AF-KE-LH-JL). What will be this consortium’s plan to let airlines in? DL currently uses T2 and in a post covid era, all that space will be needed. Where will Delta find it? Will there be an expansion of T4A or will Delta take over the whole east pier of T-ONE if it’s built (2023) in time for T2 demo?
If I’m Delta I would prefer to house all operations under one terminal even if T4 and T-ONE west are linked.
That factor will limit who (and how) can move into T-ONE.
West pier and T1 cannot coexist so the owners of TOGA need to secure at least 11 gates at the east pier to ensure the same levels of operation than precovid 2019.

Even though I’d love to see UA along JV transatlantic partner LH and whoever joins in from Star, reality just kicks in. T-ONE will be a 100% international terminal
https://www.anewjfk.com/wp-content/uplo ... web-V3.pdf

I don’t mean two/three gates can have their arrivals directed to a small domestic arrivals, so domestic UA/precleared AC can dock in. But it’s just bizarre how terminals/airports fight to be FIS-capable and this is just the opposite


It’s likely that the T1 replacement will have domestic-capable gates and facilities if for no other reason than preclearance will be expanding over time (it has substantially since T1 opened) and the flexibility to handle a wider variety of tenants makes sense. I think the current setup is less than optimal for that reason.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2268
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 12:28 pm

jfklganyc wrote:
Seat1D wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:


But UA themselves has publicly said they intend to serve IAH and DEN from JFK.


If UA publicly said this, then can you please post a link? I did a quick Google search and wasn't able to find anything. Thanks[/

“Our goal is to expand [our coast-to-coast] service first and then move on to our other gateways to be able to connect passengers through Chicago, Denver, Houston, in particular,” said Ankit Gupta, United’s vice president for domestic network planning.

https://www.afar.com/magazine/united-is ... fk-airport


There's this from the Points Guy that quotes Gupta from UA:
United will offer two daily flights on both the JFK-Los Angeles and JFK-San Francisco routes, said Gupta. The airline plans to expand the routes to at least four daily flights each in the future and then — when it can acquire the necessary slots — connect JFK to its hubs in Chicago O’Hare, Denver (DEN) and Houston Intercontinental.

The thing is, UA doesn't have the slots and will need to acquire more (what it has obtained now for LAX/SFO is not even permanent). My sense is that if they obtain more, they'll need to build on the SFO and JFK schedule and not use them on ORD/DEN, which are well served out of LGA on UA, with a new terminal, lounge, etc...I just don't see them flying short- and medium-haul out of JFK.
 
VC10er
Posts: 4321
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 1:27 pm

I do assume that the High-J 763 is not planned to be flying out of JFK for the next few years (but what do I know!) - That said, UNITED has one shot at a GREAT first impression. Had they started JFK with a 757, it would not have stood a chance of standing out. And IMHO, UA’s 787-10 and High-J 763’s are the two best to create the “talk value” those two aircraft can provide (especially in a First Class, Polaris style seat)

Given the power of first impressions, (and I know this is not a time to burn money) 1: I hope they can provide a lounge (either via a partner airline or if they actually had the time and space to build a small United Club) 2: Attention to detail on board: I find their current frosted plastic zippered envelope amenity kit to be “FINE”, but a limited edition JFK collectible kit would be great (perhaps like the collector tins from a few years ago) 3; BETTER FOOD (at least Stroopwaffles in every class, Lol) and 5: Some great breakthrough advertising and events in NYC. (I went to the celebration cocktail party at Rockefeller Center when United launched JFK/HKG, and even back then it was a very swanky event with lots of “swag” and it was very full) Perhaps something downtown in the Oculus?

As for service, I consider very good service to be a baseline requirement and while last December (when everything was still growing and investments seen everywhere) United’s service was far better than it ever was- perhaps not better and more consistent than others, but a far cry better than before based solely on UA history.

UNITED has a shot at emerging from this crisis as a great and desired NYC airline with Hudson Yards and all the Hudson River development. Everything will come down to flawless execution!
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
jfk777
Posts: 7487
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 3:01 pm

All this terminal construction at JFK is going to bring just four terminal clusters: Terminal ONE on the current T1-3 sites, T4, Jetblue from TWA until British Airways T7 and AA Terminal 8 site. With Delta being the major user at T4 it looks like the new Terminal 1 is going to be the major foreign airline terminal. AA's T8 will have their OneWorld partners. Its hard to fathom the major international airport of the country not having an " international terminal" which is what Terminal 4 was supposed to be. Always interesting to be the terminal changes at JFK.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 6425
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 4:22 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Seat1D wrote:


If UA publicly said this, then can you please post a link? I did a quick Google search and wasn't able to find anything. Thanks[/

“Our goal is to expand [our coast-to-coast] service first and then move on to our other gateways to be able to connect passengers through Chicago, Denver, Houston, in particular,” said Ankit Gupta, United’s vice president for domestic network planning.

https://www.afar.com/magazine/united-is ... fk-airport


There's this from the Points Guy that quotes Gupta from UA:
United will offer two daily flights on both the JFK-Los Angeles and JFK-San Francisco routes, said Gupta. The airline plans to expand the routes to at least four daily flights each in the future and then — when it can acquire the necessary slots — connect JFK to its hubs in Chicago O’Hare, Denver (DEN) and Houston Intercontinental.

The thing is, UA doesn't have the slots and will need to acquire more (what it has obtained now for LAX/SFO is not even permanent). My sense is that if they obtain more, they'll need to build on the SFO and JFK schedule and not use them on ORD/DEN, which are well served out of LGA on UA, with a new terminal, lounge, etc...I just don't see them flying short- and medium-haul out of JFK.


United has said otherwise.

We will see what happens, but the only thing going against your hunch is the fact that they had that operation several years ago and it didn’t work for them.

They left JFK for a reason… They simply weren’t relevant at the airport. So the question becomes what is going to be different this time?

I think the answer is a well rounded schedule to their domestic hubs. You can fill a plane from JFK to anywhere...you just get better yield on short business routes to LGA. But offering an array of hub flights at JFK builds relevance and increases yields on the important transcon routes.

If 4 daily to LA and SF is all they are aiming for, They aren’t looking to steal a market… They just want a piece of the pie.

I would look for two or three daily to the other hubs.
 
Jose747
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:56 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 5:49 pm

I wonder how reopening JFK would affect aircraft maintenance recalls,etc.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2268
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 7:01 pm

jfklganyc wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:

If UA publicly said this, then can you please post a link? I did a quick Google search and wasn't able to find anything. Thanks[/

“Our goal is to expand [our coast-to-coast] service first and then move on to our other gateways to be able to connect passengers through Chicago, Denver, Houston, in particular,” said Ankit Gupta, United’s vice president for domestic network planning.

https://www.afar.com/magazine/united-is ... fk-airport


There's this from the Points Guy that quotes Gupta from UA:
United will offer two daily flights on both the JFK-Los Angeles and JFK-San Francisco routes, said Gupta. The airline plans to expand the routes to at least four daily flights each in the future and then — when it can acquire the necessary slots — connect JFK to its hubs in Chicago O’Hare, Denver (DEN) and Houston Intercontinental.

The thing is, UA doesn't have the slots and will need to acquire more (what it has obtained now for LAX/SFO is not even permanent). My sense is that if they obtain more, they'll need to build on the SFO and JFK schedule and not use them on ORD/DEN, which are well served out of LGA on UA, with a new terminal, lounge, etc...I just don't see them flying short- and medium-haul out of JFK.


United has said otherwise.

We will see what happens, but the only thing going against your hunch is the fact that they had that operation several years ago and it didn’t work for them.

They left JFK for a reason… They simply weren’t relevant at the airport. So the question becomes what is going to be different this time?

I think the answer is a well rounded schedule to their domestic hubs. You can fill a plane from JFK to anywhere...you just get better yield on short business routes to LGA. But offering an array of hub flights at JFK builds relevance and increases yields on the important transcon routes.

If 4 daily to LA and SF is all they are aiming for, They aren’t looking to steal a market… They just want a piece of the pie.

I would look for two or three daily to the other hubs.


You bring up some valid points. I think UA's exit from JFK in 2015 was likely a mistake even if the operation then was unprofitable. UA then very much had its eye off the ball and was trying to navigate a terribly organized and executed merger, led by a CEO that probably wasn't fit for the role. The UA of 2015 is not the UA of 2019 or 2020 and Polaris is a far more competitive product, even at JFK, than the older BusinessFirst based product flying on the 757s back in 2015 when UA exited JFK. Polaris only began to roll out, slowly, in December 2016. A full year after UA exited JFK. To make ORD/DEN work from JFK, I suppose they'll need to factor in aircraft utilization and turnaround times, baed on what JFK looks like if and when they launch them and what JFK can be when it is at full capacity. There's also the issue of connections over DEN and ORD via JFK and what yields and premiums it can capture. In short, they'll figure out the math. As for the four frequencies they'll have from Feb to LAX/SFO, that seems just interim, given the low demand now. The market likely cannot support 6 x daily to LAX and 7 x daily to SFO on UA like it was in 2015. 2015 was also a transition period relative to JFK competition. In no particular order, AA had finished rolling out the A321T, replacing the 762s fully, MINT at B6 was expanding quickly, and DL had turned JFK into a profit center a couple of years prior. CO had IAH and CLE from JFK for a time and those didn't work out, but the market, and market-share dynamics, were vastly different then. We will see, I guess but I don't expect UA at JFK to be much more than a token presence.
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 8:20 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:

There's this from the Points Guy that quotes Gupta from UA:
United will offer two daily flights on both the JFK-Los Angeles and JFK-San Francisco routes, said Gupta. The airline plans to expand the routes to at least four daily flights each in the future and then — when it can acquire the necessary slots — connect JFK to its hubs in Chicago O’Hare, Denver (DEN) and Houston Intercontinental.

The thing is, UA doesn't have the slots and will need to acquire more (what it has obtained now for LAX/SFO is not even permanent). My sense is that if they obtain more, they'll need to build on the SFO and JFK schedule and not use them on ORD/DEN, which are well served out of LGA on UA, with a new terminal, lounge, etc...I just don't see them flying short- and medium-haul out of JFK.


United has said otherwise.

We will see what happens, but the only thing going against your hunch is the fact that they had that operation several years ago and it didn’t work for them.

They left JFK for a reason… They simply weren’t relevant at the airport. So the question becomes what is going to be different this time?

I think the answer is a well rounded schedule to their domestic hubs. You can fill a plane from JFK to anywhere...you just get better yield on short business routes to LGA. But offering an array of hub flights at JFK builds relevance and increases yields on the important transcon routes.

If 4 daily to LA and SF is all they are aiming for, They aren’t looking to steal a market… They just want a piece of the pie.

I would look for two or three daily to the other hubs.


You bring up some valid points. I think UA's exit from JFK in 2015 was likely a mistake even if the operation then was unprofitable. UA then very much had its eye off the ball and was trying to navigate a terribly organized and executed merger, led by a CEO that probably wasn't fit for the role. The UA of 2015 is not the UA of 2019 or 2020 and Polaris is a far more competitive product, even at JFK, than the older BusinessFirst based product flying on the 757s back in 2015 when UA exited JFK. Polaris only began to roll out, slowly, in December 2016. A full year after UA exited JFK. To make ORD/DEN work from JFK, I suppose they'll need to factor in aircraft utilization and turnaround times, baed on what JFK looks like if and when they launch them and what JFK can be when it is at full capacity. There's also the issue of connections over DEN and ORD via JFK and what yields and premiums it can capture. In short, they'll figure out the math. As for the four frequencies they'll have from Feb to LAX/SFO, that seems just interim, given the low demand now. The market likely cannot support 6 x daily to LAX and 7 x daily to SFO on UA like it was in 2015. 2015 was also a transition period relative to JFK competition. In no particular order, AA had finished rolling out the A321T, replacing the 762s fully, MINT at B6 was expanding quickly, and DL had turned JFK into a profit center a couple of years prior. CO had IAH and CLE from JFK for a time and those didn't work out, but the market, and market-share dynamics, were vastly different then. We will see, I guess but I don't expect UA at JFK to be much more than a token presence.


Leaving JFK yes or no, depending on how you look at it, but what can be said that closing a station that lost money had no impact on the bottom line based on financials for the next few years. I'm sure in a few years it will come back to the black, but it will be a little while given the restrictions NY/CA have.
 
maverick4002
Posts: 436
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2015 2:14 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 8:46 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:

There's this from the Points Guy that quotes Gupta from UA:
United will offer two daily flights on both the JFK-Los Angeles and JFK-San Francisco routes, said Gupta. The airline plans to expand the routes to at least four daily flights each in the future and then — when it can acquire the necessary slots — connect JFK to its hubs in Chicago O’Hare, Denver (DEN) and Houston Intercontinental.

The thing is, UA doesn't have the slots and will need to acquire more (what it has obtained now for LAX/SFO is not even permanent). My sense is that if they obtain more, they'll need to build on the SFO and JFK schedule and not use them on ORD/DEN, which are well served out of LGA on UA, with a new terminal, lounge, etc...I just don't see them flying short- and medium-haul out of JFK.


United has said otherwise.

We will see what happens, but the only thing going against your hunch is the fact that they had that operation several years ago and it didn’t work for them.

They left JFK for a reason… They simply weren’t relevant at the airport. So the question becomes what is going to be different this time?

I think the answer is a well rounded schedule to their domestic hubs. You can fill a plane from JFK to anywhere...you just get better yield on short business routes to LGA. But offering an array of hub flights at JFK builds relevance and increases yields on the important transcon routes.

If 4 daily to LA and SF is all they are aiming for, They aren’t looking to steal a market… They just want a piece of the pie.

I would look for two or three daily to the other hubs.


You bring up some valid points. I think UA's exit from JFK in 2015 was likely a mistake even if the operation then was unprofitable. UA then very much had its eye off the ball and was trying to navigate a terribly organized and executed merger, led by a CEO that probably wasn't fit for the role. The UA of 2015 is not the UA of 2019 or 2020 and Polaris is a far more competitive product, even at JFK, than the older BusinessFirst based product flying on the 757s back in 2015 when UA exited JFK. Polaris only began to roll out, slowly, in December 2016. A full year after UA exited JFK. To make ORD/DEN work from JFK, I suppose they'll need to factor in aircraft utilization and turnaround times, baed on what JFK looks like if and when they launch them and what JFK can be when it is at full capacity. There's also the issue of connections over DEN and ORD via JFK and what yields and premiums it can capture. In short, they'll figure out the math. As for the four frequencies they'll have from Feb to LAX/SFO, that seems just interim, given the low demand now. The market likely cannot support 6 x daily to LAX and 7 x daily to SFO on UA like it was in 2015. 2015 was also a transition period relative to JFK competition. In no particular order, AA had finished rolling out the A321T, replacing the 762s fully, MINT at B6 was expanding quickly, and DL had turned JFK into a profit center a couple of years prior. CO had IAH and CLE from JFK for a time and those didn't work out, but the market, and market-share dynamics, were vastly different then. We will see, I guess but I don't expect UA at JFK to be much more than a token presence.


Didnt Delta start making money at JFK around 2018?
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 6425
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 9:02 pm

maverick4002 wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:

United has said otherwise.

We will see what happens, but the only thing going against your hunch is the fact that they had that operation several years ago and it didn’t work for them.

They left JFK for a reason… They simply weren’t relevant at the airport. So the question becomes what is going to be different this time?

I think the answer is a well rounded schedule to their domestic hubs. You can fill a plane from JFK to anywhere...you just get better yield on short business routes to LGA. But offering an array of hub flights at JFK builds relevance and increases yields on the important transcon routes.

If 4 daily to LA and SF is all they are aiming for, They aren’t looking to steal a market… They just want a piece of the pie.

I would look for two or three daily to the other hubs.


You bring up some valid points. I think UA's exit from JFK in 2015 was likely a mistake even if the operation then was unprofitable. UA then very much had its eye off the ball and was trying to navigate a terribly organized and executed merger, led by a CEO that probably wasn't fit for the role. The UA of 2015 is not the UA of 2019 or 2020 and Polaris is a far more competitive product, even at JFK, than the older BusinessFirst based product flying on the 757s back in 2015 when UA exited JFK. Polaris only began to roll out, slowly, in December 2016. A full year after UA exited JFK. To make ORD/DEN work from JFK, I suppose they'll need to factor in aircraft utilization and turnaround times, baed on what JFK looks like if and when they launch them and what JFK can be when it is at full capacity. There's also the issue of connections over DEN and ORD via JFK and what yields and premiums it can capture. In short, they'll figure out the math. As for the four frequencies they'll have from Feb to LAX/SFO, that seems just interim, given the low demand now. The market likely cannot support 6 x daily to LAX and 7 x daily to SFO on UA like it was in 2015. 2015 was also a transition period relative to JFK competition. In no particular order, AA had finished rolling out the A321T, replacing the 762s fully, MINT at B6 was expanding quickly, and DL had turned JFK into a profit center a couple of years prior. CO had IAH and CLE from JFK for a time and those didn't work out, but the market, and market-share dynamics, were vastly different then. We will see, I guess but I don't expect UA at JFK to be much more than a token presence.


Didnt Delta start making money at JFK around 2018?


That’s hard to say. They have had a hub there of varying size since 1991. I imagine over the period of 30 years it was somewhat profitable
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1912
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 9:03 pm

maverick4002 wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:

United has said otherwise.

We will see what happens, but the only thing going against your hunch is the fact that they had that operation several years ago and it didn’t work for them.

They left JFK for a reason… They simply weren’t relevant at the airport. So the question becomes what is going to be different this time?

I think the answer is a well rounded schedule to their domestic hubs. You can fill a plane from JFK to anywhere...you just get better yield on short business routes to LGA. But offering an array of hub flights at JFK builds relevance and increases yields on the important transcon routes.

If 4 daily to LA and SF is all they are aiming for, They aren’t looking to steal a market… They just want a piece of the pie.

I would look for two or three daily to the other hubs.


You bring up some valid points. I think UA's exit from JFK in 2015 was likely a mistake even if the operation then was unprofitable. UA then very much had its eye off the ball and was trying to navigate a terribly organized and executed merger, led by a CEO that probably wasn't fit for the role. The UA of 2015 is not the UA of 2019 or 2020 and Polaris is a far more competitive product, even at JFK, than the older BusinessFirst based product flying on the 757s back in 2015 when UA exited JFK. Polaris only began to roll out, slowly, in December 2016. A full year after UA exited JFK. To make ORD/DEN work from JFK, I suppose they'll need to factor in aircraft utilization and turnaround times, baed on what JFK looks like if and when they launch them and what JFK can be when it is at full capacity. There's also the issue of connections over DEN and ORD via JFK and what yields and premiums it can capture. In short, they'll figure out the math. As for the four frequencies they'll have from Feb to LAX/SFO, that seems just interim, given the low demand now. The market likely cannot support 6 x daily to LAX and 7 x daily to SFO on UA like it was in 2015. 2015 was also a transition period relative to JFK competition. In no particular order, AA had finished rolling out the A321T, replacing the 762s fully, MINT at B6 was expanding quickly, and DL had turned JFK into a profit center a couple of years prior. CO had IAH and CLE from JFK for a time and those didn't work out, but the market, and market-share dynamics, were vastly different then. We will see, I guess but I don't expect UA at JFK to be much more than a token presence.


Didnt Delta start making money at JFK around 2018?


Yes and it was barely a profit.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 9:55 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
LondonXtreme wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
I would doubt you really KNOW what's important to UA, Only what you hope is important to UA. I've been retired almost 4 years from United and they talked about it 3 years BEFORE I retired and the Noise has only gotten Louder Since I retired as they still have CSR's and Maintenance still ASSIGNED AND WORKING AT JFK on behalf of the Star Alliance partners who still fly into JFK, JFK actually would like United to come back as they lost some clout as many Star Alliance flights Re-Routed to EWR to connect with United flights there. So? Of Course JFK would like them back, It stands to reason. If the problem is gate and terminal space for United to return TO JFK?
I'll bet that would get solved PDQ!! I can see that some might NOT want United to return to JFK like the Camel's nose under the tent flap. BUT? If United really intends to return to JFK? They Might well have to get over it. as to do it? United will have to commit to it and not just Speculate about it.

The thing I confuse is that why Star Alliance need UA at JFK. The only 2 routes UA used to and will serve from JFK are LAX/SFO. Most of star alliance partner airlines at JFK are also serving LAX/SFO.


Star Alliance does not need UA at JFK. Every major Star route out of JFK is essentially O&D. If you look at the pre-COVID map, UA can move passengers onto Star flights, and vice versa directly from SFO and LAX, without sending people to JFK, and the premium revenue stream just is not large enough to generate anything meaningful for UA to flow traffic at JFK onto LH, OS, etc..UA can realize some cost savings by co-locating with a few Star carriers at JFK, eventually, but T1 is not set up for domestic operations, is slated to be demolished at some point as it is too small for what it ended up servicing (as DL pushed so many carriers out of T4). UA at JFK will not extend to DEN and ORD. There's no need for that. It can fly those routes (and does) from LGA multiple times daily and from a brand new terminal with a much improved passenger experience and a United Club too. JFK for UA is going to be LAX/SFO and that's it. It needs to be there to be relevant in the most lucrative domestic market in the US. Most of the transit-able services on Star for UA are all available at EWR. UA will remain in T7 until it can no longer operate there, and then will cut a deal with B6 to fly from the expanded T5. By then, the industry should have recovered and B6 will consumed by either UA or AA but that's a long, long way from happening.

you mistake ONe Thing. What United CAN ALREADY DO? And what they Want to do? Are 2 completely separate Things aren't they? If you went to WHQ at Chicago and tried to tell then that? You might find yourself taking one of the 15 elevator shafts to the Bottom without Benefit OF an elevator Car. They're going back into JFK. Like it or NOT, Make Book on it! Very few if any were there when UA pulled out of JFK so I doubt there will be any regret in going Back TO JFK. S-CO was in form control of United when we left JFK but they're mostly gone now and the guys running the show NOW? Want to be back at JFK. We all know JFK cannot handle what's going on at EWR But? they also know that United has every right to BE at JFK and should Be at JFK. And Deeper Still? JFK and the Port Authority know it as well. When United left JFK? We were "weak sisters" . United is No Longer anybody's "Weak sister" and putting up a fight at JFK? Is something United Can and should do!
And I mean Make some BIG Noise!
 
jfk777
Posts: 7487
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 9:58 pm

What Delta does to be profitable at JFK is on a completely different scale then United's few flights to Los Angeles and SFO.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Nov 15, 2020 10:47 pm

jfk777 wrote:
What Delta does to be profitable at JFK is on a completely different scale then United's few flights to Los Angeles and SFO.

So? Do you think that's ALL United will do? Or are you just Hoping that's all United will do? Because I can see More, Like JFK-ORD/IAH/LAX/DEN, and SFO. all coming in tlme. No need for them to come all at once.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2268
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Mon Nov 16, 2020 12:24 am

strfyr51 wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
What Delta does to be profitable at JFK is on a completely different scale then United's few flights to Los Angeles and SFO.

So? Do you think that's ALL United will do? Or are you just Hoping that's all United will do? Because I can see More, Like JFK-ORD/IAH/LAX/DEN, and SFO. all coming in tlme. No need for them to come all at once.


You will be waiting a long time if you think UA will be adding all that at JFK.
 
JFKalumni
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:45 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Mon Nov 16, 2020 4:43 am

jfklganyc wrote:
maverick4002 wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:

You bring up some valid points. I think UA's exit from JFK in 2015 was likely a mistake even if the operation then was unprofitable. UA then very much had its eye off the ball and was trying to navigate a terribly organized and executed merger, led by a CEO that probably wasn't fit for the role. The UA of 2015 is not the UA of 2019 or 2020 and Polaris is a far more competitive product, even at JFK, than the older BusinessFirst based product flying on the 757s back in 2015 when UA exited JFK. Polaris only began to roll out, slowly, in December 2016. A full year after UA exited JFK. To make ORD/DEN work from JFK, I suppose they'll need to factor in aircraft utilization and turnaround times, baed on what JFK looks like if and when they launch them and what JFK can be when it is at full capacity. There's also the issue of connections over DEN and ORD via JFK and what yields and premiums it can capture. In short, they'll figure out the math. As for the four frequencies they'll have from Feb to LAX/SFO, that seems just interim, given the low demand now. The market likely cannot support 6 x daily to LAX and 7 x daily to SFO on UA like it was in 2015. 2015 was also a transition period relative to JFK competition. In no particular order, AA had finished rolling out the A321T, replacing the 762s fully, MINT at B6 was expanding quickly, and DL had turned JFK into a profit center a couple of years prior. CO had IAH and CLE from JFK for a time and those didn't work out, but the market, and market-share dynamics, were vastly different then. We will see, I guess but I don't expect UA at JFK to be much more than a token presence.


Didnt Delta start making money at JFK around 2018?


That’s hard to say. They have had a hub there of varying size since 1991. I imagine over the period of 30 years it was somewhat profitable


I hate when people say JFK wasn’t profitable. Back in the day, the NRT 747 was $1 million dollars a day flight. We were building mail for:

Etihad
Qatar
Singapore
JAL
Swiss
Aer Lingus
Lufthansa
Air India
Austrian
Brussels
Kuwait
Qantas
Virgin Atlantic
South African
Uzbekistan

Plus the UA domestic and International. We were dumping over 100,000 pounds of mail on the afternoon shift alone. The trucks from IAD with the ISAL mail were the worst. UA lost contracts when the original Premium Service downgraded to two class. Up until the day we closed, we were handling large groups so there was always money to be made.

During Christmas time, Etihad was always angry with us. In one day we built enough containers of mail to fill the A340-600. There were no positions left for freight and passengers bags. UA was making money.
Last edited by JFKalumni on Mon Nov 16, 2020 4:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 6425
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:20 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
What Delta does to be profitable at JFK is on a completely different scale then United's few flights to Los Angeles and SFO.

So? Do you think that's ALL United will do? Or are you just Hoping that's all United will do? Because I can see More, Like JFK-ORD/IAH/LAX/DEN, and SFO. all coming in tlme. No need for them to come all at once.


You will be waiting a long time if you think UA will be adding all that at JFK.



I dont understand.

United is TELLING us that is what they plan to add.

You keep insisting otherwise.

Help me understand where you are coming from.
 
UA857
Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:41 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Thu Dec 10, 2020 3:31 am

JFKalumni wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
JFKalumni wrote:

Several more years easily. When we left in 2015, BA was installing brand new jetbridge’s on every gate, new PC Air units, redesigning the GSE staging areas, redesigning the passenger areas and more. Knowing T7, the only item needed is a new rooftop.


The terminal is slated for closure.

It is to be demolished.

Cuomo has a plan and T7 is in the way.

United has a few years there at most. Then they will
become a B6 tenant, an AA tenant, a TOGA tenant, or a Schcipol tenant.


You’re right

Cuomo wants three items.

Gateway Tunnel
LGA Redevelopment
JFK Redevelopment


What about EWR Redevelopment?
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14438
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Dec 12, 2020 4:26 pm

UA857 wrote:
JFKalumni wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:

The terminal is slated for closure.

It is to be demolished.

Cuomo has a plan and T7 is in the way.

United has a few years there at most. Then they will
become a B6 tenant, an AA tenant, a TOGA tenant, or a Schcipol tenant.


You’re right

Cuomo wants three items.

Gateway Tunnel
LGA Redevelopment
JFK Redevelopment


What about EWR Redevelopment?


The projects that have already started, EWR Terminal One and the LaGuardia redevelopment are proceeding. Everything else is on hold, when or if they move forward depend on the recovery of air traffic, rail traffic , tunnel and bridge traffic post vaccination effort and second the possibility of government aid from Washington and or an infrastructure stimulus package the new Biden administration can work out with Congress.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
JFKalumni
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:45 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sat Dec 12, 2020 5:54 pm

STT757 wrote:
UA857 wrote:
JFKalumni wrote:

You’re right

Cuomo wants three items.

Gateway Tunnel
LGA Redevelopment
JFK Redevelopment


What about EWR Redevelopment?


The projects that have already started, EWR Terminal One and the LaGuardia redevelopment are proceeding. Everything else is on hold, when or if they move forward depend on the recovery of air traffic, rail traffic , tunnel and bridge traffic post vaccination effort and second the possibility of government aid from Washington and or an infrastructure stimulus package the new Biden administration can work out with Congress.


I think anything aviation related will probably be on hold especially JFK redevelopment. The biggest infrastructure issue that demands attention will be the gateway tunnel project. The Hudson tunnels are crumbling and it will have major implications for the region if the new tunnels are not built soon.
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 5162
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Dec 13, 2020 4:11 am

JFKalumni wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
maverick4002 wrote:

Didnt Delta start making money at JFK around 2018?


That’s hard to say. They have had a hub there of varying size since 1991. I imagine over the period of 30 years it was somewhat profitable


I hate when people say JFK wasn’t profitable. Back in the day, the NRT 747 was $1 million dollars a day flight. We were building mail for:

Etihad
Qatar
Singapore
JAL
Swiss
Aer Lingus
Lufthansa
Air India
Austrian
Brussels
Kuwait
Qantas
Virgin Atlantic
South African
Uzbekistan

Plus the UA domestic and International. We were dumping over 100,000 pounds of mail on the afternoon shift alone. The trucks from IAD with the ISAL mail were the worst. UA lost contracts when the original Premium Service downgraded to two class. Up until the day we closed, we were handling large groups so there was always money to be made.

During Christmas time, Etihad was always angry with us. In one day we built enough containers of mail to fill the A340-600. There were no positions left for freight and passengers bags. UA was making money.
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 5162
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Dec 13, 2020 4:50 am

Airlines don't cancel "$1 million a day flights". I respect that you are proud of your time at JFK with united but they were not making the money you claim. They are a business, they don't have feelings and emotions like us. They were looking at a balance sheet and numbers. They clearly thought it was the right decision at the time
 
JFKalumni
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:45 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Dec 13, 2020 11:40 am

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
Airlines don't cancel "$1 million a day flights". I respect that you are proud of your time at JFK with united but they were not making the money you claim. They are a business, they don't have feelings and emotions like us. They were looking at a balance sheet and numbers. They clearly thought it was the right decision at the time



You realize all of these actions we’re taking after 9/11 ?
 
tphuang
Posts: 6448
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Dec 13, 2020 2:03 pm

JFKalumni wrote:
slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
Airlines don't cancel "$1 million a day flights". I respect that you are proud of your time at JFK with united but they were not making the money you claim. They are a business, they don't have feelings and emotions like us. They were looking at a balance sheet and numbers. They clearly thought it was the right decision at the time



You realize all of these actions we’re taking after 9/11 ?


The math simply does not work. For recent years, The world's highest revenue route is JFK-LHR for BA and that generates around $1 billion a year in revenue or around $3 million a day. And they had around 8 flights a day IIRC with 747s on all the flights. So, each flight was generating around 400k a day. Now, JFK-LHR for BA is extremely profitable and the numbers are in 2018/19 dollars. You are saying that somehow UA was generating $1 million a day on a flight 20 years ago. That seems entirely impossible by every measure.
 
jfk777
Posts: 7487
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Dec 13, 2020 2:44 pm

Things to Tokyo have changed, back in the day when "NRT was a million dollars a day", the 744 flew to NRT and connected many people on UA flights beyond NRT to places such as Hong Kong and Singapore. Those beyond flights are toast and haven't existed for years now. With 777, 787 and the merger with Continental Tokyo flights are primarily for Tokyo passengers, many flights go to Haneda airport these days. United has nonstops to HKG & others Asian cities from Newark. Singapore is flown nonstop from UA's San Francisco hub, many Pacific cities are also flown nonstop form UA's Chicago hub.
 
JFKalumni
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:45 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Dec 13, 2020 3:13 pm

jfk777 wrote:
Things to Tokyo have changed, back in the day when "NRT was a million dollars a day", the 744 flew to NRT and connected many people on UA flights beyond NRT to places such as Hong Kong and Singapore. Those beyond flights are toast and haven't existed for years now. With 777, 787 and the merger with Continental Tokyo flights are primarily for Tokyo passengers, many flights go to Haneda airport these days. United has nonstops to HKG & others Asian cities from Newark. Singapore is flown nonstop from UA's San Francisco hub, many Pacific cities are also flown nonstop form UA's Chicago hub.


Thank you !!!

Back in the day UA was making so much money in the Asia markets Sub UA line stations such as JFK and EWR out of Terminal A were handling 777’s and 747’s to the pacific. After 9/11, UA moved everything to the hubs. Our Asia flights were moved to IAD, most of our wide body equipment including our Elephant Beta deicers were shipped to the hubs. UA decided to create a three class premium service and market flights with tags.

UA890 NRT-LAX-JFK
UA891 JFK-LAX-NRT
UA892 ICN-SFO-JFK
UA893 JFK-SFO-ICN
UA862 SYD-SFO-JFK
UA863JFK-SFO-SYD
UA838 MEL-SYD-LAX-JFK
UA839JFK-LAX-SYD-MEL
UA6 OGG-SFO-JFK
UA7 JFK-SFO-OGG

What made it a million dollars a day?

Passengers loads, Mail and freight containers stretching from gate C7 all the way over to C10, SPD’s, ISAL, and countless others.

TechOps treated those planes with the highest priority everyday. Mind you I didn’t even mention all of the contract ground handling (Varig and others) and the freighters waiting down by hanger 19.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6448
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Dec 13, 2020 4:53 pm

JFKalumni wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
Things to Tokyo have changed, back in the day when "NRT was a million dollars a day", the 744 flew to NRT and connected many people on UA flights beyond NRT to places such as Hong Kong and Singapore. Those beyond flights are toast and haven't existed for years now. With 777, 787 and the merger with Continental Tokyo flights are primarily for Tokyo passengers, many flights go to Haneda airport these days. United has nonstops to HKG & others Asian cities from Newark. Singapore is flown nonstop from UA's San Francisco hub, many Pacific cities are also flown nonstop form UA's Chicago hub.


Thank you !!!

Back in the day UA was making so much money in the Asia markets Sub UA line stations such as JFK and EWR out of Terminal A were handling 777’s and 747’s to the pacific. After 9/11, UA moved everything to the hubs. Our Asia flights were moved to IAD, most of our wide body equipment including our Elephant Beta deicers were shipped to the hubs. UA decided to create a three class premium service and market flights with tags.

UA890 NRT-LAX-JFK
UA891 JFK-LAX-NRT
UA892 ICN-SFO-JFK
UA893 JFK-SFO-ICN
UA862 SYD-SFO-JFK
UA863JFK-SFO-SYD
UA838 MEL-SYD-LAX-JFK
UA839JFK-LAX-SYD-MEL
UA6 OGG-SFO-JFK
UA7 JFK-SFO-OGG

What made it a million dollars a day?

Passengers loads, Mail and freight containers stretching from gate C7 all the way over to C10, SPD’s, ISAL, and countless others.

TechOps treated those planes with the highest priority everyday. Mind you I didn’t even mention all of the contract ground handling (Varig and others) and the freighters waiting down by hanger 19.

You are making a claim that seems entirely not reflective of facts. Again, the most profitable flights internationally in 2019 was generating 400k a day on passenger revenue. Think about how much that is in 2000 when you take away inflation. Do you think cargo can somehow generate 2 or 3 times the revenue of the Highest revenue route 20 years later?
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Dec 13, 2020 6:05 pm

It's the classic rose colored glasses of the old school United guys. I've worked with them in many stations and it's always the same story.

In Denver they talk of the million dollar flights to BIL on DC10s stuffed so full of mail they had to put mail in the overhead compartments. A lot of it is just BS. I am sure those flights made decent money, but if all of these things UA did were raking in money hand over first they never would have needed to merge with CO.
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

Re: UA Plans to Return to JFK in 2021

Sun Dec 13, 2020 6:55 pm

tphuang wrote:
JFKalumni wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
Things to Tokyo have changed, back in the day when "NRT was a million dollars a day", the 744 flew to NRT and connected many people on UA flights beyond NRT to places such as Hong Kong and Singapore. Those beyond flights are toast and haven't existed for years now. With 777, 787 and the merger with Continental Tokyo flights are primarily for Tokyo passengers, many flights go to Haneda airport these days. United has nonstops to HKG & others Asian cities from Newark. Singapore is flown nonstop from UA's San Francisco hub, many Pacific cities are also flown nonstop form UA's Chicago hub.


Thank you !!!

Back in the day UA was making so much money in the Asia markets Sub UA line stations such as JFK and EWR out of Terminal A were handling 777’s and 747’s to the pacific. After 9/11, UA moved everything to the hubs. Our Asia flights were moved to IAD, most of our wide body equipment including our Elephant Beta deicers were shipped to the hubs. UA decided to create a three class premium service and market flights with tags.

UA890 NRT-LAX-JFK
UA891 JFK-LAX-NRT
UA892 ICN-SFO-JFK
UA893 JFK-SFO-ICN
UA862 SYD-SFO-JFK
UA863JFK-SFO-SYD
UA838 MEL-SYD-LAX-JFK
UA839JFK-LAX-SYD-MEL
UA6 OGG-SFO-JFK
UA7 JFK-SFO-OGG

What made it a million dollars a day?

Passengers loads, Mail and freight containers stretching from gate C7 all the way over to C10, SPD’s, ISAL, and countless others.

TechOps treated those planes with the highest priority everyday. Mind you I didn’t even mention all of the contract ground handling (Varig and others) and the freighters waiting down by hanger 19.

You are making a claim that seems entirely not reflective of facts. Again, the most profitable flights internationally in 2019 was generating 400k a day on passenger revenue. Think about how much that is in 2000 when you take away inflation. Do you think cargo can somehow generate 2 or 3 times the revenue of the Highest revenue route 20 years later?


not even close, freight simply wasn't what it was today.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos